Pledge of Allegiance ruled unconstitutional - again
Maybe this time, the Supreme Court will take the case seriously and rule rationally. U.S. District Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled today that the pledge's reference to one nation "under God'' violates school children's right to be "free from a coercive requirement to affirm God.''
Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento
atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when
recited in public schools.
Newdow, the same attorney and doctor who argued the case before the Supreme Court last year (only to have it dismissed because he didn't have custody of his daughter, on whose behalf he had filed the suit), filed a new suit on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.
The Becket Fund, a "religious rights" group that is a party to the
case, said it would immediately appeal the case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the court does not change its precedent, the group will go to the Supreme Court.
With two vacancies that will surely be filled by fundamentalists, the Supreme Court is likely to find another lame excuse to dismiss the case. But we're praying for a rational outcome anyway...
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001/20050914/1501609721.htm&ewp=ewp_news_
0905pledge
Karlton said he was bound by precedent of the 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals, which in 2002 ruled in favor of Sacramento
atheist Michael Newdow that the pledge is unconstitutional when
recited in public schools.
Newdow, the same attorney and doctor who argued the case before the Supreme Court last year (only to have it dismissed because he didn't have custody of his daughter, on whose behalf he had filed the suit), filed a new suit on behalf of three unnamed parents and their children. Karlton said those families have the right to sue.
The Becket Fund, a "religious rights" group that is a party to the
case, said it would immediately appeal the case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. If the court does not change its precedent, the group will go to the Supreme Court.
With two vacancies that will surely be filled by fundamentalists, the Supreme Court is likely to find another lame excuse to dismiss the case. But we're praying for a rational outcome anyway...
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/story.jsp?idq=/ff/story/0001/20050914/1501609721.htm&ewp=ewp_news_
0905pledge
posted by Editor at Large at 1:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home